Why rugby is vastly better as a national game

Though the earlier post castigated Union in its current form, it still remains head and shoulders above soccer, for the following reasons among others:




Supporter/player relationship



Never a backward step



… and lastly, the nature of the battlefield:


Brian-Moore_jpg_1552134cWhen the national rugby side runs onto the field, this is God and Harry, St. George, the resplendent rose on the white background, the warriors, the gladiators and the style of game is far more like real warfare.

Soccer has finesse, it’s true but Union has finesse plus grunt and you can physically see, at a glance, if the team is being pushed back or is going forward. It’s the reason the royals attend matches – it’s the real deal, it’s where the last vestiges of national pride are found.

12 comments for “Why rugby is vastly better as a national game

  1. Harbinger
    February 11, 2013 at 14:55

    Rugby epitomises honour, respect, common courtesy and sportsmanship. Football on the other hand epitomises, dishonourable conduct, disrespect foul mouthed behaviour and no sportsmanship. It mirrors corrupt society where football players, like corporation fat cats are grossly overpaid. This is why football has so many followers because unlike rugby the game is simple and any idiot could understand it. It also created the hooligan culture. It used to be a beautiful game. It no longer is. It’s nothing but full of over paid, nancy boy primadonnas who like to date strippers and ‘it girls’.



  2. February 11, 2013 at 15:00

    Why do I find myself agreeing with you completely, Harbinger? πŸ™‚

  3. nigly24
    February 11, 2013 at 15:08

    Soccer players on average buy 17 new Ferrari’s a week, its like hollywood, if the Brad armpits get paid a billion each time they turn up at the studio, think what the bosses must make I am not surprised to hear of criminal dealings in soccer. Get rid of the money and soccer might become a sport again; but then who gives a whatsit.

  4. JD
    February 11, 2013 at 15:20

    soccer? what’s that?

    on the other hand– πŸ™‚

    JD recently posted Why rugby is not vastly better as a national game πŸ™‚

  5. Chuckles
    February 11, 2013 at 18:22

    A game for thugs played by gentlemen.. and so forth

    One of my physics lecturers (in a distant and simpler time) made the observation that despite the beauty of watching a competent ‘passing’ team playing, in much of the world soccer remained a game where the philosophy reduced to,
    ‘I have the ball, you take it away from me if you can..’

    and contrasted that with rugby, where the underlying philosophy was almost completely a team approach. I’ll not extend it to his further musings on the intelligence necessary to implement these, as they bordered on the slanderous, but lets just say he was not a soccer fan.

  6. February 11, 2013 at 18:30

    You give us Zidane, the headbutter, JD? πŸ™‚

  7. February 11, 2013 at 18:36

    I saw a women’s rugby match as a youngster, and I have to agree about the manliness.

  8. JD
    February 11, 2013 at 19:37

    as with everything he did, Zidane headbutts so elegantly n’est-ce pas πŸ™‚

  9. Amfortas
    February 12, 2013 at 00:39

    I am in the deep autumn of my years and can say that I have never robbed a bank, beat up an old lady or played a game of football. I was a fine full back rugger player in my teens though.

  10. February 12, 2013 at 08:30

    Full back eh? You’d never ever guess what I played. Mainly open-side but also scrum half – now work that one out. I was never able to. Must have been the only two positions I understood and you never got your gonads grabbed or your nose pinched out there.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *